• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Seven Nations?

Let us be blunt here, having a relegation/promotion idea just wouldn't work. You'll end up with a huge blow to an established player (especially the likes of Scotland whose Rugby lies on a rather frightening precipice right now over oblivion) and a huge embarrassment towards the new nation who gets promoted.

In terms of developing smaller nations, you simply cannot rush these things. You can't just chuck the likes of Spain, Germany or Romania into the Six Nations when the sport itself hardly makes the headlines of the local newspaper as it is. Coming in one year and crashing out to heavy 100 - 0 defeats the next, what good does that do apart from humiliate and demoralise the team?

No, in order to get nations like Spain, Russia, Portugal, Germany, etc into top flight NH competition, you need to gradually embrace them. Their players need to play in France, Italy, England and the ML, the teams need to play more summer warm ups against teams from the ML, GP and the T14 and if they do get a shot at the Six Nations, it must be consistent, not on a promotion/relegation basis.

Italy got to where they are today because they knew that they were not going anywhere even if they received the wooden spoon year on year on year. To achieve proper development, you need consistency. Having a crappy promotion/relegation system just defeats the purpose of development and it annoys the hell out of everyone.

Which leads me onto my next point. Expand it beyond six nations, and you'll have to start looking at dropping the idea of holding it every year. Maybe a seven or eight nations would be better suited as an event held once every two years instead of an every year event.
 
The two-legged playoff idea is part of the gradual introduction of the lower tier nations to the top tier. Obviously in the first 10-20 years, the lower teams wouldn't really stand a chance of beating the bottom 6N team, but after a few attempts, it is my belief that the better nations from the 6NB would be able to get in. Sure they'd get a few drubbings, but it's worth it for the good of the expansion of rugby.
 
I have to agree with Prestwick. Unless they are used to playing against good quality opposition all the time, any 2nd tier European side is going to get spanked in a two legged playoff.

They won't improve because of it, they'll simply go back to playing lower class oppostion once more.
 
I do feel that something needs to be done with regards Aregnitina though. They are an emerging rugby nation and as such should be encouraged. I don't personaly feel there's place for them in the 6 Nations, and I would worry about them becoming whipping boys for a few years should they join the Tri-Nations (and therefore set the sport in Argentina backwards). Would there be any way for them to play in a competition against teams such as Fiji and Samoa? [/b]



Argentina emerging nation??????????????? Did you see the lasts results????



Fully blossomed nation I´d rather say, Will.
 
I have to agree with Prestwick. Unless they are used to playing against good quality opposition all the time, any 2nd tier European side is going to get spanked in a two legged playoff.

They won't improve because of it, they'll simply go back to playing lower class oppostion once more. [/b]
Tbh, I haven't really heard any better ideas.
 
<div class='quotemain'>
to the person who said the pumas cant playt till 2011. bullsh*t, sanzar and fox would be very flexible and i reckon fox would love to have a few more games to charge for. the tri nations has changed format in recent times in terns of schedule anyway.
[/b]

Yeah, I thought the plan was to have them in before the next round of TV rights negotiations for the Tri Nations but that SANZAR got bored of Argentina arguing with itself. [/b][/quote]



I heard it was an official satement of the SANZAR, not BS. Besides who are you guys??

The CEO of Fox Sports and the president of SANZAR?



Anyway it seems that the Tri Nations series is getting kind of boring, and sooner than later changes will come?
 
I'm not sure that we could have a 7 nations but more a 4 nations with argentina in the trhee nations. It must be more interesting with fidji or samoa teams ...
 
I agree with most of Prestwicks argument. However, I think it should stay at 6 for the time being.

I wasn't aware of the ENC, sounds like the best way to bring the other nations on.
 
Prestwick you have an identical and exact argumentative posting style to someone familiar
 
Argentina need to be in a major competition, they'r a gd side, but there is no other decent rugby countires near them 4 them to play! International teams are not going to get better if they dont face decent competition! theres talk bout them joinin the sx nation n playin in belgum or they could play in the tri nation! who knows? but they do need to play in a major comp if they want 2 develop as a side!
 
maybe instead of a relegation and promotion competition, the 6N teams can be decided by world rankings or something along those lines??


i know the same 6 teams would be in the league every year but it would give lesser teams an incentive to improve rugby in their country so they can aspire to enter into the 6N???



just a thought.............
 

Latest posts

Top